Of course it did. You don't get 10% of the population leaving an area bc of the weather that they have dealt
with for years. Taxes changed and so they went. Run a poll!! Washington loves to do that. They they'll know without speculation.

2:46 pm January 20, 2011

www.taxproblem.org wrote :

Sounds like a good idea to me, I'd like to see the poll numbers myself.

no! the simplicity of this argument belies the impossibility of having reasonable discussion. as a resident of north carolina, a good friend of mine was transfer to florida for employment. north carolina has 7% state income tax vs florida's 0%. but when he calculated the total taxes paid, in the two states on the same income the outcome was the same. property taxes and other local taxes offset the state income tax in north carolina. if we ever want to have a meaningfull conversation about taxes it needs to be total taxes paid not just the outcome of one tax.

4:31 pm January 20, 2011

Tom S. wrote :

The report in question misunderstands the IRS data at its heart. They claim that it documents billions of dollars in lost income, but the IRS data is about people who move, not dollars. The data simply says that people who moved over the 13 years between 1995 and 2007 earned more where they wound up then they did before they left. This is not a good thing but it is (a) not news, and (b) not what the report authors say.

4:44 pm January 20, 2011

David S Lesperance wrote :

Golden Geese move for a cocktail of reasons which includes tax. Some things relate to life events or stages, some to life events (like moving to children or away from empty nests) and some because they are getting older and are now focusing on things like estate tax. The first two government has no control over, the later they do. Denying that it is a component of the cocktail is economic suicide as the 1% Golden Geese pay over 40 % of the total personal tax take.

5:14 pm January 20, 2011

Rick D. wrote :

I'm pretty sure Rhode Island's estate tax averages 6%, not .06%. 6% of $1 million is $60,000; .06% of $1 million is $600. I doubt many people would leave so they can leave $600 more out of a million to their heirs. $60,000 is another matter.

6:11 pm January 20, 2011

Pat R. wrote :

So all those complaining they left RI because of the high estate tax would return if the estate tax is eliminated? I'm not buying that. Some Golden Geese may move for estate tax reasons, but if the Golden Geese find the absence of an estate tax so appealing, why didn't the Geese flock to Wyoming when its estate tax ended?

8:46 pm January 20, 2011

David S Lesperance wrote :

It is not about attracting back the Golden Geese who left. It is about not getting them to leave in the first place !

To attract them back you have to make it not just the way it was but even better to overcome the inertia disruption cost of relocating. In addition you also have to overcome the psychologic lack of trust they have that you will revert back to your old ways. As for your Wyoming argument it just makes my point about this being a cocktail of factors of which just tax is one. Maybe Wyoming was not attractive in other ways which meant no estate tax was not sufficient on it's own. Unfortunately government only has control over this factor.

I fully understand that State governments need money to overcome deficits. We could argue all day about mistakes that were made in the past and who is to blame for them. Once the blame tail was pinned on the donkey, you would still have the problem. You can also raise taxes and try to ignore the reality that tax is part of the decision cocktail of the exact taxpayers who you so tremendously over rely for your tax revenue base. The risk is you quickly drive yourself over the fiscal cliff and the Golden Geese you needed to get you back up have now left and you have scared away other Golden Geese who you were trying to attract. You can also cut services, upset voters and risk defeat in the next election. Tough choices all around but you have to make a decision to do one, the other, or a combination of both, because the day of fiscal reckoning is here.

9:00 pm January 20, 2011

Tom L wrote :

Is this writer serious? He actually claims that RI is ok because the population went up. Over the last decade they ranked 49th in growth. second to last - only Michigan did worse. And they consider that good????

8:23 am January 21, 2011

William Samuels wrote :

RI is a wonderful state in which to live. Our taxes are high, a premium for our location, varied life styles, diversity, beaches, and proximity to the seashore, mountains, and large cities. The problem in attracting people is our difficulty in attracting industry (ie, jobs). If somehow, we could make this an industry friendly state, I believe we could increase our tax base and retain the talent that resides here.

9:41 am January 21, 2011

Edmund Dantes wrote :

"Do you think the state’s estate tax has chased out the rich?"

Does the sun rise in the east where you live?

Before 2004, when the federal credit for state death taxes was converted to a deduction, all states had death taxes. Now only 20 of them do. Even California dropped its death tax! All 20 of the death tax states are experiencing low growth, because at base death taxes are really an enormous penalty on successful small businesses. No one wants to starts a business in a place where they know that even when they win, they will lose.

I personally know of many wealthy people in CT and NY who minimized their ties to high-tax home states, establishing residency in low-tax states even as they spent less than six months a year in their northeast homes. Not all went to FL, some retired to NH. Did they do this only for tax savings? No, but taxes were typically the straw that broke the camel's back. All things being equal, they might have preferred to pay taxes to their first state of residence, but all things were not equal.

And it's not only the income tax, though that is important. These same people had their estate plans redone in the new state of residence, to be certain to avoid death taxes in their former home state.

This situation will not last, the economic damage of state death taxes is becoming too big to ignore. Even the stupidest politicians will have to bend to reality.

11:52 am January 21, 2011

Johnny YO wrote :

I worked at an estate planning firm in RI for a year and a half, and this is what I saw:

The estate tax is a big deal. Remember RI has pretty high property values, so many estates are over $800k. In places like Newport, Watch Hill, a 4 typical bedroom home can easily exceed $1 million. Some elderly people are passing away having purchased their home in the 60s and 70s for $50,000, and their home's current value is now over $1.5 million.

However, to escape the RI estate tax, you only have to buy a winter home in Florida and claim residency in Florida, putting your RI home into a trust. People who want to keep part of their life in RI buy a house in Florida and do this arrangement.

The RI estate tax doesn't help keep people in RI, and doesn't attract people to move to RI, but it also probably isn't an active factor in pushing people to move out of RI.

The main reason older people move from RI is to be closer to their kids who have moved from RI. When this older generation originally had children in RI, the kids were stuck at a dead end. There were few good paying jobs in the state of RI, and housing prices were too high for them to purchase their own home.

The high housing prices forced the younger generation to move. Many have relocated in the South East, in places like Charelston SC (The Newport of the South). Parents still living in RI who have now retired see little reason to stay in a state, which is cold for 7 months of the year, pay high property taxes, and be far away from their children and grandchildren.

They can sell their $800,000.00 home in RI and move to South Carolina, or North Carolina or Virginia and buy a really nice almost estate like home there for the same price. Or they can downsize and put $400 or $500k more into their retirment. Or they could move to central or northern florida and buy a palace.

12:04 pm January 21, 2011

Johnny YO wrote :

As I state above, RI has very high property taxes. A house with an assessed value of $500k can have property taxes as high as $14,000.00 a year.

In order for RI to attract more jobs, attract more people, and to become a fiscally healthier state, RI needs to wrestle control of the state from the public employee unions. The City of Newport spends approximately 70% of its operating budget to pay for current public salaries and pension defficiencies. There are more firefighters in Newport per capita than ANY city in the United States. The police union has structured this gimick that any type of work done near a city road requires an off duty police office on overtime to watch the work. Its no wonder that a police force with an operating budget of $4 million a year, goes over every year by $800k.

Not to mention that the public employee union is a huge racket. Sons of firefighters and cops are always chosen to be hired over everyone else, and daughters and sons of teachers are always the first picked. The friends of teachers get their children in the AP classes, and guaranteed gpas, its cronyizm at its best

With lower property taxes, and with more money going to actual services, the state and its finances will improve.

A discussion of all taxes would be most fair. The hidden taxes in RI include the prevailent hand of organized and disorganized crime, cronyism, "engineered ignorance" of the electorate, and the "don't worry about it" attitude of its' citizenry in general. Calamities befall those with their heads in the sand, and there are too many beaches in RI.

WE the people are the problem. What we get for government is a reflection of us! thoughtless, rude, corrupt and greedy. We're a mess, and we won't change until the Apocalypse irregardless of all the 'good-government' groups popping up. Hope? We're hopeless. Like criminal children. Beautifull? This is not a beautiful place...unless you like swamps. Get over it people. Wake up, RI.

11:24 am January 23, 2011

Tom K. wrote :

The estate tax may not be driving out the rich, but high income taxes (mine are over 9%), high property taxes and high corporate taxes continue to frighten away young professionals and businessmen. I am a physician in RI and I am actively searching for another job in a state like Texas or Florida. I wouldn't recommend RI to anyone. Why would anyone open a business here when you can cross over to Taxachussetts and enjoy a lower rate?

10:32 am January 25, 2011

TiredOfFlippingTheBill wrote :

One of the guys in our investment group here in CA was asked to take a survey the other night. He told them he was going to record the survey or he would not take it. He was allowed. It was about what he would agree to for the state to reduce the deficit. It was definitely Democrat in leaning. The questions were about raising state income taxes, raising sales tax, raising property taxes, and doing away with Prop 13. There was nothing about cutting spending or reducing services.

He gave them hell on all sides -- told them that they have to cut spending and that more people have to start paying state income taxes -- less than half currently do. He told them that it is inevitable that they cut services. He also told them that higher taxes will cause him to move out of CA.

1:23 pm April 11, 2011

poop wrote :

ri sucks

5:49 pm June 6, 2015

barnie collins wrote :

Although not super rich me and my 3.7mil are going to Fl. Screw RI

Add a Comment

Error message

Name

We welcome thoughtful comments from readers. Please comply with our guidelines. Our blogs do not require the use of your real name.

Comment

About The Wealth Report

The Wealth Report is a daily blog focused on the culture and economy of the wealthy. It is written by Robert Frank, a senior writer for the Wall Street Journal and author of the newly released book “THE HIGH-BETA RICH.”

Top Groups In Personal Finance

Share your own investing savvy and learn from experts and other investors about how mutual funds work, which funds are best for various portfolios, new types of mutual funds and other facets of fund investing.